Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > Understood. Still, the source code release as is is of little use for most > _users_ (at least on Windows & Mac).
But not on Unix. And having a long tradition on Unix, I'm not sure who and where "most users" of LyX are. > Should the binaries really just be an "addition" ??? Are they actually? > For example http://www.lyx.org/Download suggests that they are released > from you, "the LyX project", and not from some dubious third party. I did not say anything about a "dubious third party". If we wouldn't think the binaries are well done and stable, we wouldn't put them on our server. But they are an addition, yes. As Jean-Marc says, many open source projects do not provide any binaries themselves. > Half of the users probably don't even understand (and do not need to know) > what "source code" and "binaries" means ... My opinion is: they should. The open source community is no freeware service provider. > All I want to say is: things could be a bit more user-friendly if the > announcement to users (not to devel) is delayed by a few days. I guess most Unix users would not call this "user friendly". Why should we hold back the release from them? Why should Mac users wait until the windows installer is ready (or vice versa)? (I understand the point that you want to know when a new LyX release is ready for _you_. However, I think Bennett and Uwe and Joost always informed the users list after they have uploaded their installer). Jürgen
